2014 PLP 1688 (PTD)
Messrs RAINBOW INDUSTRIES, MULTAN Versus SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD
| Citation | 2014 PLP 1688 (PTD) |
| Forum / Court | Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Bench Members | Abdul Rauf Chaudhry, Federal Tax Ombudsman |
| Parties | Messrs RAINBOW INDUSTRIES, MULTAN Versus SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD |
| Primary Law | Export Oriented Units and Small and Medium Enterprises Rules, 2008 |
Q1: What are the key laws and sections cited in 2014 PLP 1688 (PTD)?
This judgment primarily cites: Export Oriented Units and Small and Medium Enterprises Rules, 2008 as referenced in Pakistani case law index.
Q2: Which judicial bench decided the case 2014 PLP 1688 (PTD)?
The case was heard and decided by the Federal Tax Ombudsman bench comprising: Abdul Rauf Chaudhry, Federal Tax Ombudsman.
Q3: What is the official citation format for this judgment on Pakistan Law Portal?
Cite this legal precedent as: 2014 PLP 1688 (PTD) (Messrs RAINBOW INDUSTRIES, MULTAN Versus SECRETARY REVENUE DIVISION, ISLAMABAD). Read the full summary and cross-referenced laws free on Pakistan Law Portal.
Laws Cited
Representation
- 5. Mrs. Kanwal Ali, Deputy Collector Multan appeared along with Ch. Zafar Iqbal, Advocate to present this case on behalf of MCC Multan. Mian Abdul Ghaffar, Advocate represented the complainant.
Headnotes / Summary
R. 3
Establishment of the Federal Tax Ombudsman Ordinance (XXXV of 2000), Ss. 2(3) & 9
Federal Board of Revenue, S.R.O. 327(I)/2008 dated 29-3-2008
License for an Export Orientated Unit
Issuance of
License number allotted to company but formal license not issued due to lapse by Customs Collectorate
Effect
Harassment tantamount to maladministration
Complainant-company in question, which exported all its products, applied for issuance of an export orientated unit under S.R.O. 327(I)/2008 dated 29-3-2008 (Rules)
Company was granted formal approval by the Customs authorities on the relevant file and licence number was also allotted to the company, however formal licence could not be issued as Additional Collector concerned directed his office to obtain format of the licence from authority concerned and prepare the same accordingly
Formal licence was not issued to the company and when company sought clearance of one of its consignments, customs authorities raised the plea that company did not possess the requisite licence, thus it should pay the requisite duties
Failure of Customs Department to issue formal certificate (licence) was a lapse by the Collectorate of Customs for which no blame could be apportioned to the company
Two consignments belonging to the company were cleared despite formal license having not been issued
Departmental proceedings against the company were of the genus of harassment tantamount to maladministration
Federal Tax Ombudsman recommended that Federal Board of Revenue should direct the Collector Customs to grant approval for grant of licence to the company in terms of S.R.O. 327(I)/2008 dated 29-3-2008 (Rules) after the company had submitted all necessary requisitioned documents, and that the case instituted by the Collectorate Customs against the company should be withdrawn. Umar Farooq, Advisor Dealing Officer. Mian Abdul Ghaffar for Authorized Representative. Mrs. Kanwal Ali, Deputy Collector, MMC Multan for Departmental Representative.
Judgment & Decree
(b) The charge of threatening has vehemently been denied. Notice for the recovery of duty/taxes was issued on the inadmissible clearance of goods under S.R.O. 327(I)/2008 dated 29-3-2008 as the complainant was not in possession of the licence. (c) No loss of foreign exchange has taken place as the complainant himself has stated in para 7(b) of preface to his complaint that he is engaged in 100% export of its production. The complainant has failed to fulfil the prescribed conditionalities for getting a licence of "Export Oriented Unit" under rule 3 of S.R.O.327(I)/2008 dated 29-3-2008. (d) The insurance policy provided by the unit was faulty and certain other requirements as envisaged in S.R.O.327(I)/2008 were also not fulfilled by the Unit. (e) Map of the manufacturing Unit showed certain discrepancies. (f) General bond equal to sum of Rs. one million has been submitted which does not cover the amount of duty and taxes involved on the imported and locally procured goods. (g) Messrs Rainbow industry did not apply to the Collector of Customs for issuance of analysis certificate showing the input and output ratio of the goods to be manufactured along with wastages because of the fact that they were not in possession of E.O.U. license.
4. On the basis of the above the licence, according to the Collectorate, was refused and thus not issued.
5. Mrs. Kanwal Ali, Deputy Collector Multan appeared along with Ch. Zafar Iqbal, Advocate to present this case on behalf of MCC Multan. Mian Abdul Ghaffar, Advocate represented the complainant.
6. Parties heard and documents perused.
7. The licence of an export oriented unit, as required under S.R.O.327(I)/2008 was approved on file. Even a licence number was allotted. The licence was acted upon in the clearance of two consignments. Formal document could not be issued to the complainant as the Department did not have the requisite form on which the entries were required to be made. It sought these from MCC Lahore. Thus failure to issue the formal certificate was a lapse of the Collectorate for which no blame could be apportioned to the complainant. Findings:
8. Subsequent Departmental proceedings are of the genus of harassment tantamount to maladministration Recommendations:
9. FBR to direct? (i) the Collector to grant approval for grant of licence to the unit Messrs Rainbow in terms of S.R.O. 327(I)/2008 dated 29-3-2008 after Messrs Rainbows has submitted all necessary requisitioned documents; (ii) the case instituted by the Collectorate against the Unit on this account be withdrawn; and (iii) compliance be reported within thirty days. MWA/72/FTO Order accordingly.